There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every We will never allow ads because we must remain independent.
We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph. Dpurporting to deliver a number of "non-religious" reasons that same-sex marriage should not be allowed. Despite the marriage-related title, many of the listed reasons are actually attacks on homosexuals' parenting rights, as well as single parents and any other arrangement that doesn't resemble the traditional nuclear family.
Despite a legitimate doctorate in economics from the University of Rochester, Dr.
Non religious arguments against homosexuality, seems to follow the usual crank symptom of being so insecure in their qualification that they must be referred to as Dr. D at all times. Like most Gish Gallop lists, there aren't really 77 reasons given here. Many are vague re-wordings of the same point mostly "children need both fathers and mothers" repeated ad nauseam and some don't really fall into the category of "reason" at all - even by a broad definition - but are merely whining statements Non religious arguments against homosexuality supposed fact.
In support of the assertion that children need both parents, Dr. D repeatedly says that this is backed up by the need for children to Non religious arguments against homosexuality and feel close to their biological parents. To cite her biography on her old site, she adopted a Romanian boy inthus robbing him of his essential right to know his biological parents and experience his culture and heritage.
Is that an ad hominem? A shameless tu quoque? Yep, and damn proud of it. Nothing is cited at any point in the list, although if you care to give Dr.
D the benefit of the doubt and say that there isn't room for citations on a mere 2-page pamphlet, that's fine. But, the original word count of all of these points combined is about 2, - about the size of a reasonable essay that would include footnotes and the text of the original is remarkably squashed to make it fit onto two sides.
The remaining points in the list not falling into "repeat" or "whining" can be categorised as "irrelevant", and so the
Non religious arguments against homosexuality of more specific detail to back up these assertions cannot be excused. This seems to be an exercise in reaching
Non religious arguments against homosexuality magical number, 77, rather
Non religious arguments against homosexuality building convincing arguments.
If it was about simple brevity, only a dozen points at most would be needed; if it was about providing a consistent argument there would Non religious arguments against homosexuality more coherent prose rather than bullet points. As with most modern homophobic tactics e. This is, of course, bollocks, since allowing same-sex marriage wouldn't ban or destroy hetero-sex marriage, which would still comprise the vast majority of marriages even if every gay and bisexual person on the planet chose to marry someone of the same sex.
So Dr Morse Ph. D's list is fairly underhanded right from the start. D has not established that child-rearing is the primary and sole reason behind marriage even if this was demonstrated, wouldn't it logically follow for marriages to be annulled once a child reaches maturity?
Some people say research shows Dr. D cannot form a coherent argument, even given two pages of text to do it in. The argument so far is that children must be with biological parents, and only with both biological parents.
But the only way to consistently follow this up is to make fertility tests mandatory as a qualification to get married, ensure rapists marry their victims, ban adoption in all forms, never take children from their parents even in the most dire cases of abuse, ban divorce, and then make divorce mandatory when their children reach a certain age or the couple becomes infertile.
D doesn't see this obvious solution to the problems and arguments she presents! This section is almost entirely irrelevant to same-sex marriage owing to the false analogy with step-parents - having a child from age 0 isn't entirely the same situation as suddenly getting a child aged 10 with a history and established relationship.
As a defense of marriage as opposed to an attack on same-sex marriage, this
Non religious arguments against homosexuality have a point, but then why would Dr.
Or, like, 12 reasons given the number of blatant repeats. Jennifer Roback Morse Ph. Cast your mind to the bland summer of when you were writing Non religious arguments against homosexuality thesis at Rochester. I know it was economics, but I'm sure you had a thing called a "reference" section. You know, the bit at the back with all Non religious arguments against homosexuality numbers and the italics and all Non religious arguments against homosexuality I know it was a
Non religious arguments against homosexuality time ago but surely it's not too difficult.
You've repeated yourself so much here that you have more than enough space to add some citations. This is tedious bullshit, and seems to be laboring under the assumption that same-sex marriage will lead, long term, to some weird lesbian world government.
This list seems to assume heterosexual couples have no fertility problems. It also seems to suggest that it's homosexual couples that have spurred the idea of "entitlement" to this treatment. D must be aware that this is wrong, as in the previous section she made reference to the UK's use of fertility treatment, and that this was made available on the NHS certain circumstances long before the UK introduced civil partnerships and only introduced full marriage rights to non-hetero couples in England and Wales in So, in short, an argument about fertility treatment is really a dead end.
On the other hand, we acknowledge the existence of reasoned opinions that dual-gender parenting is the optimal environment for children. These opinions, while thoughtful and sincere, were largely unsupported by reliable scientific studies.
The research appears to strongly support the conclusion that same-sex couples foster the same wholesome environment as opposite-sex couples and suggests
Non religious arguments against homosexuality the traditional notion that children need
Non religious arguments against homosexuality mother and a father to be raised into healthy, well-adjusted adults is based more on stereotype than anything else.
Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex are superior to same-sex couples," Walker, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President Ronald Reagan, wrote in his opinion. D lives in a fantasy world where a minority of people can destroy an institution that doesn't really exist in the first place.
Despite this supposedly being a non-religious list, none of these "reasons" only about half of this section count as arguments under even broad terms can support the general argument without resorting to religious definitions of marriage, as Dr. D seems eager and willing to throw out society's definitions and attitudes in support of her own Non religious arguments against homosexuality as a Catholic.
This list is getting strange. It seems that all same-sex couples are selfish in "wanting" children. Does this imply that children are best raised in environments they're not wanted? Further from that, it seems to be less about an issue of marriage and now more about scaremongering over the government controlling marriage rights. However, this list is supposedly "non-religious" in nature, so there can really be only two options for who controls and recognises marriage rights: As arguments about what society wants seem to be largely Non religious arguments against homosexuality here because you'd quickly find most of society is in favour of not arbitrarily restricting rights to groups of people these days Non religious arguments against homosexuality left with the government as a de facto provider and insurer of rights.
So, why be scared Non religious arguments against homosexuality it, as without it marriage wouldn't exist at all? This section
Non religious arguments against homosexuality a religious persecution complexrather supposedly reasons to support something.
There is really not much left here to say. D, your Non religious arguments against homosexuality to Non religious arguments against homosexuality marriage is failing miserably. Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. Retrieved from " https: Sexuality Homophobia Gish Gallops.
Views Read Edit Fossil record. Community Saloon bar To do list What is going on? External links Twitter Facebook Discord.
This page was last modified on Non religious arguments against homosexuality Marchat Unless explicitly noted
Non religious arguments against homosexuality, all content licensed Non religious arguments against homosexuality indicated by RationalWiki: For concerns on copyright infringement please see: The moderator election has started!
We are electing 6 moderators and 2 alternatives to serve in Nominate users here and read their campaign slogans here! We're so glad you came Sexuality. Reach Non religious arguments against homosexuality the subject. Bra Celibacy Forum of Ugly Griswold v. The essential public purpose of marriage is to attach mothers and fathers to their children and to one another.
Non religious arguments against homosexuality would be better phrased as an essential public purpose of marriage. Others include the ability for a spouse to represent the other, receive certain entitled benefits and be a next-of-kin representative for medical treatment to name just a few.
D Non religious arguments against homosexuality to hold any pretense of this being non-religious in nature and not blatantly homophobic, she would have to develop an argument that suggests why homosexual couples should be denied these other rights, but she doesn't. Same sex marriage separates children from
Non religious arguments against homosexuality least one parent.
This argument can be applied to any child had out of wedlock - perhaps those born following a Non religious arguments against homosexuality - or any child where a single parent is involved. This argument also applies to adoption by couples of any sex. Hence this establishes nothing of value to an argument Non religious arguments against homosexuality same-sex marriage specifically. Same sex marriage separates these functions among different people. This is effectively a repeat of 2.
No argument is presented as to why this Non religious arguments against homosexuality the case. Cultural and social heritage comes from more than just parents; they involve your social setting, peer groups, institutions and can be influenced by a wide variety of stimuli. D no reason why this sort of experience can only be arrived at by a heterosexual couple that is married.
Even though it is not always possible, children have the best life chances when they are by their biological married parents. In the first instance, citation needed. Secondly, this argument applies to a multitude of situations as noted in 2. The research in this area is preliminary. We don't have studies that last long Non religious arguments against homosexuality to show the long-term impact of being raised in
Non religious arguments against homosexuality same sex household.
MORE: Sexually harass synonym